Problem of Leadership

Not a great deal has changed in leadership qualities through the years, although concepts and application are always matters for analysis, understanding and adaptation.  From season to season emphases change, and that is important for persons who are engaged in leadership.  For example, during my first years as a professional there was a strong hangover of the rugged, individualistic pattern of leadership found in authoritarian perceptions (I have the authority, so do what I say).  Henry Ford, or John Calvin, and many others are illustrative of the genre.  It is a method that is sometimes identified as militaristic.  Today, the person is presumed most perceptive in leadership who is sensitive to the followers, workers, citizens he or she leads, and is most skillful in drawing them, through personality and persuasion, into processes related to leadership/followership.  Leadership emerges from respect for perceived integrity/ability in the leader

This democratic system, which has been emerging for some decades to dominance, and has always been attractive (as demonstrated in loving family leaders) is more complex than the authoritarian system.  Only God can use authoritarian leadership consistently well, but that is a different matter related to a perfect leader.  Even God adapts to human tendency to error when dealing with mankind.  The democratic system is highly dependent upon a number of skills developed in the leader.  Some of those skills are much more difficult to come by than many leaders or wannabe leaders imagine.  Some persons seem born to the task, but tendencies in individuals are always present for any field of interest – some are going to be musicians, and others, no matter how hard they work at it, will never become excellent in music.  In Christian ministry, for example, a pastor may be characterized as: He was born to the manse.  The saying simply means that his/her influence is so compelling as to seem to be natural – personal as well as divine calling.  He or she is not perceived, either personally or professionally, as being found in any other context than this occupation and life.  We need to remember that in nearly any context there are exceptions (sometimes becoming accidents) that demonstrate gifts or talents that were not earned.  They may be honed so to become quite exceptional.  It is likely that David the King of Israel had natural gifts of leadership, so great as to permit him to recover from several drastic violations of public approval and personal life.  There ought to be some open effort to identify these leaders, and work with them in their educational programs to aspire to leadership identifying the kind of leadership they can offer, and a mysterious humility that will make them accepted by a sufficient number of followers.  If nations chose leaders from understanding what leadership is, and found those candidates that would meet the expectations, the democratic society would likely flourish to satisfaction.  From the ancients to the modern analysts there has been a yearning for leadership.  Considerable literature exists on what it is, but modest grasp on how to make it practical.  Celebrity, wealth, influence, personality, politics, and other factors are in the mix – for good or ill.

The problem of leadership in the Church is even more difficult than for other institutions because of the Christian perception of God and morality.  A primary virtue for the Christian is obedience to God.  God, represented in Jesus Christ, and communicating through Scripture, the Holy Spirit, and conscience is not open to negative questioning.  The primary reason for this is that God, being perfect and revealed to mankind is not changed in any way, even in democratic give and take.  Why would one bother discussing the will of God, with purpose to amend it rather than be obedient to it?  Any amendment to his will, his leadership, his work, his preferences, would be less than the best action.  In the ideal, we are tied to obedience to the will and authority of God as we discover it, and finding ways to use the results in democratic principles for relationships with mankind.  To change God would mean changing perfection, a foolish thing to do even if it could be accomplished.  But to assert that one human (leader) alone knows the will of God is arrogance.  The leader, godly or otherwise, is reliant on persuasion and power.  The power of the godly person/leader ought to be in knowledge of the context of interest, skills with persons, goal directions and integrity.  Some evaluators make integrity the top value of the leadership skills.  For the Christian integrity is evaluated in the counsel of Scripture – beneficial to all societies.